Template talk:MissingInfo

when should we include scans? this category could get very crowded...Peter 13:35, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

Hmm... correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this template is just for unsubmitted files (orphan images; there's a special page to single them out). --Feldmahler 14:29, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
That's what I created it for (clarified now). On the other hand, I'm not sure why we would not include submitted files. Can we be sure that those have been checked thoroughly enough? --Leonard Vertighel 14:43, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
Well, a lot of it are from known public-domain sources (like the company-we're-not-allowed-to-say), but other than that information it'd be very hard to actually check the exact publication information... very few people have access to large music libraries, and even those libraries are missing many editions (like I have first-hand experience of). So to avoid severely crowding the category (and rendering it useless), I'd suggest to not tag them and let people who have access to the original edition add the publication information. The reason tagging unsubmitted files is a good idea is because they have not yet gone through the submission process, during which the submitter would have to select a copyright type. --Feldmahler 14:57, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
That makes sense. But I wonder if it might nonetheless be useful to have maybe yet another category (or several) for submitted files lacking information. If we categorize the file description pages, this would not be visible for the users (because the files are linked directly from the work pages) (users as opposed to contributors). Though I agree that such a category could get extremely crowded, so maybe it would not be a particularly useful tool even for those contributors who would be willing to look up and fill in the missing informations... Should we ask for opinions in the forum, or do we dismiss the idea right now? ;) --Leonard Vertighel 15:18, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
I'd say dismiss it temporarily now ;) The wiki system doesn't seem to like this kind of usage... Though actually, I was wondering whether it's nice to set up a SVN system for the IMSLP branch of Mediawiki? Because a lot of this functionality that people have been requesting recently is rather inefficient using the standard wiki system, but I'm also too busy to actually code the requested extensions... I don't know if there are many programmers among IMSLP contributors who would like to modify the code directly? Of course I'll be checking the modifications before syncing to the server itself, so there should (theoretically) be little breakage. It'd be like the main Mediawiki development system. --Feldmahler 15:34, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
Might be a good idea... I don't know if I could help, because I'm not a good programmer at all (in fact, I'm a major expert for producing Spaghetti code, which is probably not what you want - though surprisingly it tends to do what I want in most cases :)). Anyway, how about asking in the forum? --Leonard Vertighel 15:53, 11 April 2007 (EDT)